appendix d specialist reports (including terms of ... · 2 terms of reference and study methods 2.1...
TRANSCRIPT
APPENDIX D
SPECIALIST REPORTS
(INCLUDING TERMS OF REFERENCE)
D1 – ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT REPORT
D2 – SECTION 21c AND i WATER USE RISK ASSESSMENT
D1 – ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT REPORT
PROPOSED UPGRADE OF THE GRASSRIDGE – SUNNYSIDE – MELKHOUT 132 KV POWERLINE, EASTERN CAPE PROVINCE
ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
Prepared for:
JG Afrika
Port Elizabeth
Prepared by:
Scherman Colloty & Associates
1 Rossini Road
PORT ELIZABETH, 6070
November 2017
SPECIALIST REPORT DETAILS
This report has been prepared as per the requirements of the Environmental Impact Assessment
Regulations and the National Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of 1998), any subsequent
amendments and any relevant National and / or Provincial Policies related to biodiversity
assessments.
Report prepared by: Dr. Brian Colloty Pr.Sci.Nat. (Ecology) / Certified EAP / Member SAEIES.
Expertise / Field of Study: BSc. Botany & Zoology, BSc (Hons) Zoology, MSc Botany, Ph.D
Botany, acting as an independent consultant from 1996 to present.
I, Dr. Brian Michael Colloty declare that this report has been prepared independently of any
influence or prejudice as may be specified by the National Department of Environmental Affairs
Signed: ……………… Date:…5 November 2017…………
This document contains intellectual property and proprietary information that is protected by
copyright in favour of Scherman Colloty & Associates cc. The document may therefore not be
reproduced, or used without the prior written consent of Scherman Colloty & Associates cc. This
document is prepared exclusively for JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd and is subject to all confidentiality,
copyright, trade secrets, and intellectual property law and practices of SOUTH AFRICA
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 1 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 4 2 Terms of reference and study methods ............................................................................................. 4
2.1 Aquatic Assessment ........................................................................................................................... 4 2.2 Vegetation assessment ...................................................................................................................... 6 2.3 Limitations .......................................................................................................................................... 8
3 Project locality AND dESCRIPTION .................................................................................................. 8 4 Results ............................................................................................................................................... 9
4.1 Vegetation map of South Africa (2014) .............................................................................................. 9 4.2 Vegetation survey results ................................................................................................................. 12 4.3 Plant Species of Special Concern (SSC) and protected species .................................................... 14 4.4 Aquatic environment......................................................................................................................... 18 4.5 Provincial, Regional Biodiversity Conservation Plans and Protected Areas .................................... 29
5 Ecological sensitivity assessment .................................................................................................... 32 6 Provincial legislation and policy ....................................................................................................... 33 7 Assessment of Impacts and Identification of Management Actions ................................................. 33
7.1 Impact 1: Loss of vegetation ........................................................................................................... 33 7.2 Impact 2: Loss habitat of containing protect species or Species of Special Concern .................... 35 7.3 Impact 3: The potential spread of alien vegetation .......................................................................... 35 7.4 Impact 4: Loss of Critical Biodiversity Areas (CBA), Protected Areas and habitat fragmentation .. 36 7.5 Impact 5: Loss of aquatic habitat .................................................................................................... 36 7.6 Impact 6: Changes to the hydrological regime – sedimentation and erosion ................................. 37 7.7 Impact 7: Potential water quality impacts ........................................................................................ 37
8 Conclusion and recommendations ................................................................................................... 38 9 References ....................................................................................................................................... 39 10 Appendix 1 -DWS Risk assessment Matrix........................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.
LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Dominant plant species observed ..................................................................................................... 12 Table 2: Plant species protected in terms of the Provincial Nature Conservation Ordinance (PNCO) of 1974
recorded in the study site. ................................................................................................................ 15
LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Google Earth image indicating the alignment of the existing alignment shown by the blue line ....... 9 Figure 2: The South African Vegetation Map (Mucina and Rutherford, 2012) in relation to the western half of
the existing line ................................................................................................................................. 10 Figure 3: The South African Vegetation Map (Mucina and Rutherford, 2012) in relation to the eastern half of
the existing line ................................................................................................................................. 11 Figure 4. The study area in relation to the NEMA listed Threatened Ecosystems .......................................... 11 Figure 5: Mainstem rivers and the quaternary catchments associates with the study area ............................ 19 Figure 6: The existing alignment spans numerous watercourses, with no towers currently located in any of
these systems .................................................................................................................................. 19 Figure 7: The known wetlands within the western portion of the current alignment ...................................... 20 Figure 8: The known wetlands within the eastern half of the current alignment ............................................ 20 Figure 9: The Eastern Cape Biodiversity Conservation Plan (Berliner & Desmet, 2007), Terrestrial CBAs .. 29 Figure 10: The Eastern Cape Biodiversity Conservation Plan (Berliner & Desmet, 2007), Aquatic CBAs .... 30 Figure 11: NMBM Bioregional conservation plan CBAs ................................................................................. 31
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 2 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
LIST OF PLATES
Plate 1: A view of the high degree of landscape transformation within areas located in the Gamtoos Estuary
floodplain .......................................................................................................................................... 21 Plate 2: Alien vegetation that dominates the Van Stadens to St Albans areas, of which large areas had recently
burnt ................................................................................................................................................. 22 Plate 3: Housing development within the upper Chatty and Swartkops valleys.............................................. 22 Plate 4: A view of the existing tracks in the servitude within Ticket looking towards African Dawn ............... 23 Plate 5: A view of the transmission line servitude as it exists Hopewell Conservation Estate and traverses’
degraded thicket within the proposed KwanoBuhle EXT site .......................................................... 24 Plate 6: The transmission line within the KwanoBuhle area, show the ease of access from the existing track
.......................................................................................................................................................... 24 Plate 7: An existing track connecting various transmission line servitudes within Coega Bontveld .............. 24 Plate 8: A view of the transmission line within Humansdorp Shale Renosterveld .......................................... 25 Plate 9: An individual Milkwood below the transmission line........................................................................... 26 Plate 10: A typical example of an unchanneled valley bottom wetland within the region near the Swart River
.......................................................................................................................................................... 26 Plate 11: A channelled valley bottom wetland near the transmission line near the Gamtoos River ............... 27 Plate 12: Several pans like the one shown in this image occur within the region within the thicket areas ..... 27 Plate 13: An Endorheic Pan that has been avoided by the transmission line ................................................ 28 Plate 14: a view of the transmission line crossing point over the Swartkops Estuary ..................................... 28
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 3 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
ACRONYMS
CBA Critical Biodiversity Area
CBD Central Business District
DAFF Department of Agriculture Fisheries and Forestry
ECBCP Eastern Cape Biodiversity Conservation Plan
EIA Environmental Impact Assessment
GIS Geographic Information System
NEMBA National Environmental Management Act (Act 10 of 2004)
NEMBA AIS National Environmental Management Biodiversity Act – Alien
Invasive Species Regulations of 2014.
NFEPA National Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Areas (CSIR)
PNCO Provincial Nature Conservation Ordinance
POSA Plants of South Africa database – SANBI plant distribution checklist
QDS Quarter Degree Square
SABIF South African Biodiversity Information Facility, a SANBI database
that contains both faunal and floral species records
SANBI South African National Biodiversity Institute
SC&A Scherman Colloty & Associates
SSC Species of Special Concern
EN Endangered
Vu Vulnerable
NSBA National Biodiversity Assessment
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 4 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
1 INTRODUCTION
Scherman Colloty & Associates cc (SC&A) was appointed by JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd as an
independent specialist to evaluate the terrestrial and aquatic environments that may be affected by
the proposed upgrade.
This document follows on from results obtained in a survey of the regional literature and
observations made during a site visit conducted in September 2017 via aerial reconnaissance and
then groundtruthing several areas in October 2017, that were identified as important such as Thicket
/ Bontveld areas or would contain a high number of specie of special concern. The main objective
of this report is to provide comment on the potential impact of the activities when upgrading, the
transmission line (Figure 1), but for the purposes of this report and the impact assessment it has
been assumed that no water courses or wetlands will be disturbed or need to be crossed, and that as
far as possible the existing track within the servitude will be used.
Several important national and provincial conservation plans were also reviewed, with the results of
those studies being included in this report. Most conservation plans are produced at a course scale
so it thus important to verify the actual status of the study area during this initial phase, prior to the
final of the development plan being produced.
2 TERMS OF REFERENCE AND STUDY METHODS
2.1 Aquatic Assessment
The Specialist Terms of Reference (ToR) for the Surface Water Impact Assessment were as
follows:
• Identify and delineate aquatic systems and associated biota that may be impacted upon by the
proposed project;
• Identify and rate potential environmental impacts;
• Provide a significance rating of surface water impacts which included a rating of the ecological
sensitivity of the site, and the effect of the development on the ecology of the site;
• Identify mitigation for negative and positive impacts; and
• Make recommendations for the Environmental Management Programme Report.
This report thus includes following aspects:
• A map demarcating the relevant local drainage area of the respective and watercourses or wetland/s,
i.e. the waterbody, its respective catchment and other areas within a 500m radius of the study area.
This will demonstrate, from a holistic point of view the connectivity between the site and the
surrounding regions, i.e. the hydrological zone of influence. Maps depicting demarcated waterbodies
will be delineated to a scale of 1:10 000, following the methodology described by the DWS, together
with a classification of delineated waterbodies and their functionality.
• The determination of the ecological state of any waterbodies incl wetlands, estimating their
biodiversity, conservation and ecosystem function importance with regard ecosystem services.
• Recommend buffer zones and No-go areas around any delineated aquatic zones based on the
relevant legislation, e.g. any bioregional plans of conservation guidelines or best practice.
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 5 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
• Assess the potential impacts, based on a supplied methodology
• Provide mitigations regarding project related impacts, including engineering services that could
negatively affect demarcated waterbodies.
• Geo-referenced GIS shape files of the wetland / riverine areas.
• The Risk Assessment in the DWS format which will determine if a GA or full WULA will be required for any of the activities if required.
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 6 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
2.2 Vegetation assessment
The Specialist Terms of Reference (ToR) for the Vegetation Impact Assessment were as follows:
• Desktop assessment of available data layers (vegetation types, red data book species, bioregional
plans, etc.);
• Site assessment to ground truth desktop assessment;
• Provide a significance rating of ecological impact which included a rating of the ecological sensitivity
of the site, and the effect of the development on the ecology of the site; and
• Identify mitigation for negative and positive impacts; and
• Make recommendations for the Environmental Management Programme Report
SC&A endeavours to provide a separate which would include the following aspects:
A desktop and literature review of the area under investigation will be conducted to collate as much
information as possible prior to any detailed fieldwork. The purpose of the desktop assessment is to
rank relevant areas according to their ecological sensitivity and to identify areas of least ecological
risk (to be assessed during the EA phase).
Other relevant literature for e.g. South African Biodiversity Information Facility (SABIF, which
includes the PRECIS plant distribution database), South African Bird & Herpetological Atlas
Projects, relevant Red Data books, provincial ordinances and all systematic bioregional /
conservation plans, will also be consulted. Attention would be paid to the CBA 1 & 2 areas shown
in the Eastern Cape Biodiversity Conservation Plan (ECBCP) and where relevant the Nelson
Mandela Bay Municipality Bioregional Plan.
Fieldwork will be limited to visual sightings by means of transect walks and plot-based sampling,
while particular attention will also be paid to the occurrence Red Data species or Protected species.
Vegetation units will be sampled by means of the following techniques as per each site: • Data collection will be plot-based and in the form of vegetation samples within selected reference
areas to categorise the various vegetation units.
• Results from the data analysis will provide a description of the dominant and typical species occurring
on the site(s), and will include:
o Threatened, endemic or rare species, with an indication of the relative functionality and
conservation importance of the specific community in the area under investigation
o Invasive or exotic species present in the area
o The functional and conservation importance of all vegetation communities in investigation
Additional information of faunal community residing on the area of investigation will be sourced
from distributional data/records (both recent and historical), relevant literature, the private sector
and other atlas projects.
Habitat areas (based on the species compositions of the vegetation analysis, topography and soil
study) will be ranked into high, medium or low classes in terms of their significance based on the
Ecological Sensitivity and Conservation Importance. A sensitivity and habitat map (including buffer
zones if applicable) will be produced based on the above information.
Recommendations and mitigation measures, where required, will also be included in the report with
proposed buffers
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 7 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 8 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
2.3 Limitations
Fieldwork was limited to visual sightings while walking the transmission line alignment, while
attention was paid to the occurrence of Red Data species and/or Protected species, while recording
as many of general species observed together with photographic records. An opportunity was
presented by an unrelated project that may also require a transmission line from Humansdorp to the
San Souci Sub Station, thus the same alignment was flown during September 2017.
To obtain a comprehensive understanding of the dynamics of the flora communities within a study
site, as well as the status of endemic, rare or threatened species, assessments should always consider
investigations at different time scales (across seasons/years) and through replication. However, due
to time constraints these long-term studies are not feasible and are mostly based on instantaneous
sampling.
Therefore, due to the scope of the work presented in this report, a detailed investigation over time
was not possible, coupled to the fact that little rain had fallen during the spring growth period prior
to sampling, while a significant portion had burnt during the recent fires (although mostly alien
species). Thus, several other assessments, regional vegetation studies and scientific literature was
also consulted to determine the type and nature of the vegetation found present.
3 PROJECT LOCALITY AND DESCRIPTION
(Excerpt from the BAR)
The area under investigation is contained within the existing powerline servitude, which measures
31 m in width (15.5 m to either side of the centre line of the existing powerline). The route of the
powerline, which measures 93 km in length, starts at the Grassridge Substation, located within the
Nelson Mandela Bay Metropolitan Municipality, runs past the Sunnyside Substation, and
terminates at the Melkhout Substation, both of which are located within the Kouga Local
Municipality.
The following activities are proposed to be undertaken to upgrade the existing 132 kV powerline: • Replacement of the existing Chicadee conductor with Kingbird conductor, which is a slightly thicker
and heavier conductor, and therefore has the capacity to conduct higher current loads;
• Replacement of the existing All Dielectric Self Supporting (ADSS) optic cables with 10kA greased
Optical Ground Wire (OPGW). The proposed OPGW can perform the dual function of providing an
electrical groundwire for the network, whilst the optical fibres within the cable create an independent
telecommunication system;
• Strengthening of the existing poles by installation of stay brackets on the intermediate structures as
well as additional middle stays on strains, to accommodate the additional weight of the proposed
conductor;
• Installation of additional stays, possibly requiring the construction of new stay foundations, on both
intermediate and strain structures; and
• Establishment of temporary, 4 m wide, jeep-track roads to allow access to the powerline by
construction vehicles during the construction phase. All access roads will be routed within the
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 9 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
powerline servitude area (31 m in width). Establishment of these roads will require the clearance of
vegetation, but will not include any excavation or the importation of construction materials.
It must be noted, that no access roads will be routed through any watercourses or wetland areas.
The existing structures currently in use on the line comprise guyed monopoles. These structures
will be retained, and no new structures will be installed.
Figure 1: Google Earth image indicating the alignment of the existing alignment shown by the blue line
4 RESULTS
4.1 Vegetation map of South Africa (2014)
The Vegetation Types of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland (Mucina and Rutherford, 2006 with
2012 2014 spatial data), indicated that the alignment will intersect four plant community types as
shown in Figure 2 and 3. These included the following:
Vegtation Type Mucina &
Rutherford
Vegetation Code
NSBA Listing NEMBA Listing
Albany Alluvial Vegetation Aza6 Endangered Endangered
Albany Coastal Belt AT9 Least Threatened Not Listed
Algoa Sandstone Fynbos FFs29 Endangered Vulnerable
Coega Bontveld AT7 Least Threatened Not Listed
Gamtoos Thicket AT4 Least Threatened Not Listed
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 10 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
Humansdorp Shale
Renosterveld
FRs19 Endangered Endangered
Kouga Grassy Sandstone
Fynbos
FFs28 Least Threatened Not Listed
Sundays Thicket AT6 Least Threatened Not Listed
Three are listed in terms of the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act (10 of
2004), Government Notice No 1002 (11 December 2009), i.e. as critically endangered or
endangered in terms of the National List of Ecosystems, see above and Figure 4.
Figure 2: The South African Vegetation Map (Mucina and Rutherford, 2012) in relation to the western half of the existing line
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 11 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
Figure 3: The South African Vegetation Map (Mucina and Rutherford, 2012) in relation to the eastern half of the existing line
Figure 4. The study area in relation to the NEMA listed Threatened Ecosystems
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 12 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
4.2 Vegetation survey results
According to the SANBI PRECIS database the study area Quarter Degree Squares contain
approximately 4253 plant species. This high number of plant species was associated with the large
variety of vegetation types and habitats found in the region. These range from Fynbos, Thicket,
Bontveld and Renosterveld areas located within the study area. These habitats did coincide with the
vegetation units described in Figure 2 and 3, although impacts had altered the species compositions
within the landscape and within the existing servitude.
The greatest impact observed was the conversion / transformation of natural vegetation for grazing
agriculture / pivots near the Gamtoos (Plate 1), alien vegetation cover near Thornhill / Van Stadens
and Lady Slipper to St Albans (Plate 2), and large-scale housing development within the Swartkops
/ Chatty Valley (Plate 3), amongst others.
The study area alignment or access track has also lead to the removal of thicket vegetation,
particularly in the Gamtoos / Thornhill areas (Plate 4) and to a degree in the Hopewell /
KwanoBuhle environs (Plate 5 & 6). The servitude impact within the Bontveld and fynbos
vegetation types has had lesser impact as most of the vegetation has remained intact, except for the
jeep track that has been created to access the transmission line servitude (Plate 7 & 8).
Approximately 189 species were recorded in the actual alignment with the dominant species listed
below (Table 1). This low overall species diversity when compared to the surrounding region and
the anticipated species checklists was attributed to the fact that the creation of the access track and
the overall land use impacts have diminished the overall plant diversity.
The exception again being the thicket areas between the Gamtoos River, Van Stadens River, any
remaining Sundays Thicket and Coega Bontveld, although with impacts still show a high degree of
species diversity alongside the existing transmission line.
Table 1: Dominant plant species observed
Plant Type Species
Trees and shrubs: Aloe africana, A. arborescens, A. ferox, A. ciliaris, Cussonia spictata,
Dicerothamnus rhinocerotis, Helichrysum spp., Vachellia natalita, Schotia
afra, Ziziphus mucronata, Leonotis leonurus, Tecoma capensis, Clutia
alaternoides Vachellia karroo, Olea europea, Searsia, Carissa bispinosa,
Pteroclestrus tricuspdatus, Plumbago, Cussonia spictata,
Chrysanthemoides monelifera
Herbs and
shrublets:
Aloe striata, A. maculate, Rhoicissus tridentate, Ledebouria spp.,
Pelargonium, Sansevieria hyacinthoides, Asparagus aethiopicus, A.
africanus, A. falcatus, Haemanthus coccineus, Dicerothamnus
rhinocerotis, Helichrysum teretifolium, H. spp, Erica spp., Syncarpha spp,
Agathosma mucronulata, Metalasia densa, Helichrysum anomalum,
Helichrysum nudifolium, Felicia filifolia, Ledebouria revoluta, Satyrium
membranaceum, Passerina obtusifolia, Stoebe plumosa, Tephrosia
capensis, Centella asiatica, Anthospermum galioides, Disparago ericoides,
Scenecio spp,
Succulents: Lampranthus tenuifolias, Crassula compacta, Bulbine, Euphorbia
triangularis, E. stellata, E meloformis, E. globosa.
Reeds: Phragmites australis, Thypha capensis, Cypersus textilis
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 13 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
Grasses: Themeda triandra, Aristida junciformis, Brachiaria serrata, Cymbopogon
marginatus, Cynodon dactylon, Eragrostis capensis, E. curvula, Ficinia
nigrescens Melinis repens subsp. repens, Tristachya leucothrix,
Alien species: Psidium guajava, Solanum mauritianum, Opuntia ficus-idinca, Acacia
longifolia, A. cyclops, A. mearnsii, Eucalyptus spp, Pinus spp., Amaranthus
thunbergii, Cirsium vulgare, Conyza candensis, Ditricha graveolans, Picris
echioides, Senecio ilicifolius, Limonium sinuatum, Plantago lanceolate,
Pennisetum clandestinum
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 14 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
4.3 Plant Species of Special Concern (SSC) and protected species
Several plant Species of Special Concern (Protected) were successfully identified in the study area,
and only those found within in the alignments are shown Table 2.
All Mesembryanthemaceae and Aloes species (except for Aloe ferox), are protected in terms of the
Nature and Environmental Conservation Ordinance (19 of 1974). These species will require a
permit from the Provincial Environmental Affairs Department to be removed/destroyed (Port
Elizabeth Branch: Mr Alan Southwood). Several Erica species were also observed and are also
listed under the PNCO. While an isolated Milkwood trees (Sideroxylon inerme) was also observed
(e.g. 33.913341S 25.60624E) (Plate 9). These are protected under the National Forestry Act under
DAFF.
However, it is unlikely that any of these protected trees would need to be disturbed if no new tracks
are created or the final placement of any additional stays are adjusted within these areas. This
should be considered during the final walk down phase, by a botanist that must mark the thicket
areas that may contain these species and should be avoided then be avoided by the contractor.
No listed red data species, which encompasses threatened or rare species, were observed either
within the existing access track that follows the current line (listed in terms of the International
Union for Conservation of Nature, IUCN see Red List of South African Plants
(http://redlist.sanbi.org/index.php - accessed 17 September 2017).
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 15 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
Table 2: Plant species protected in terms of the Provincial Nature Conservation Ordinance (PNCO) of 1974 recorded in the study site.
Species Threatened, Endemic and/or
Protected
Aloe africana
All species of the genus Aloe except
Aloe ferox are Protected by the
Provincial Nature Conservation
Ordinance.
Aloe striata
Haemanthus coccineus
All species of Amaryllidaceae are
Protected by the Provincial Nature
Conservation Ordinance.
Crassula perfoliata
Protected by the Provincial Nature
Conservation Ordinance.
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 16 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
Sideroxylon inerme
Protected by the National Forest Act
Carpobrotus deliciosus
All Mesembryanthemaceae species
are Protected by the Provincial Nature
Conservation Ordinance.
Ruschia sp.
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 17 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
Corpuscularia lehmannii
Drosanthemum hispidum
Delosperma sp.
Bergeranthus scapiger
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 18 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
Ericaceae All Erica species
Euphorbiacae Euphorbia globosa, E. meloformis
4.4 Aquatic environment
The preferred alignment occurs within the following catchments within the South Eastern Coastal
Belt Ecoregion located within the Mzimvubu-Tsitsikamma Water Management Area (Figure 5) • K90F – Seekoei / Swart rivers
• K90G - Kabeljous River
• L90C – Gamtoos River
• M20B – Van Stadens / Maitlands rivers
• M10C - Brak River
• M10D – Swartkops / Chatty rivers
• M30B – Coega / Brak rivers
These catchments are characterised by perennial, non-perennial water courses and drainage lines
associated with these mainstem systems listed above (Figure 6).
In terms of the National Freshwater Ecosystems Priority Areas (NFEPA) assessment, all of
watercourses within the site have been assigned a condition score ranging from C to E/F (Nel et al.
2011), indicating that they are mostly moderately to largely modified but with some biological
significance. This is largely due to the high degree of transformation that has taken place within the
catchments of these systems through to conversion of the natural fynbos to pasture. The only
remaining riparian zones are located within the steep river valleys associated with the study area,
most of which have been lost to alien tree invasion, while several wetlands remain as these areas are
too wet for agricultural production or grazing. The only exceptions being the portions of the Coega,
Brak, Swartkops and Chatty river reaches that were rated as E/F, i.e. no longer have any natural
function. This is due to the industrial development, large scale transformation for housing and the
associated illegal dumping and leaking sewers that have affected these systems.
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 19 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
Figure 5: Mainstem rivers and the quaternary catchments associates with the study area
Figure 6: The existing alignment spans numerous watercourses, with no towers currently located in any of these systems
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 20 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
Figure 7: The known wetlands within the western portion of the current alignment
Figure 8: The known wetlands within the eastern half of the current alignment
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 21 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
According to the National Freshwater Ecosystems Priority Area (NFEPA) wetland data, and the
National Wetland Inventory Data being updated by CSIR/ SANBI (currently version 5.1) indicated
several wetlands could occur within the study area. It should be noted that the report author is
currently assisting the CSIR / SANBI team in updating this database, thus the wetlands within the
study area have been delineated or verified.
These were classified as follows as shown in Figure 7 and 8:
1. Valley bottom wetlands – unchanneled (Plate 10)
2. Valley bottom wetlands – channelled (Plate 11)
3. Endorheic pan / depressions (Plate 12 & 13)
4. Artificial or man-made systems such as dams, reservoirs / irrigation balancing dams
5. Estuaries (Plate 14)
Plate 1: A view of the high degree of landscape transformation within areas located in the Gamtoos Estuary floodplain
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 22 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
Plate 2: Alien vegetation that dominates the Van Stadens to St Albans areas, of which large areas had recently burnt
Plate 3: Housing development within the upper Chatty and Swartkops valleys
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 23 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
Plate 4: A view of the existing tracks in the servitude within Ticket looking towards African Dawn
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 24 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
Plate 5: A view of the transmission line servitude as it exists Hopewell Conservation Estate and traverses’ degraded thicket within the proposed KwanoBuhle EXT site
Plate 6: The transmission line within the KwanoBuhle area, show the ease of access from the existing track
Plate 7: An existing track connecting various transmission line servitudes within Coega Bontveld
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 25 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
Plate 8: A view of the transmission line within Humansdorp Shale Renosterveld
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 26 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
Plate 9: An individual Milkwood below the transmission line
Plate 10: A typical example of an unchanneled valley bottom wetland within the region near the Swart River
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 27 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
Plate 11: A channelled valley bottom wetland near the transmission line near the Gamtoos River
Plate 12: Several pans like the one shown in this image occur within the region within the thicket areas
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 28 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
Plate 13: An Endorheic Pan that has been avoided by the transmission line
Plate 14: a view of the transmission line crossing point over the Swartkops Estuary
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 29 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
4.5 Provincial, Regional Biodiversity Conservation Plans and Protected Areas
The provincial conservation authority, Eastern Cape Department of Economic Development,
Environment Affairs & Tourism (DEDEAT) together with a broad range of stakeholders assessed
the conservation status of the province using a GIS based Systematic Conservation Planning System
(Berliner and Desmet, 2007). The Eastern Cape Biodiversity Conservation Plan (ECBCP) was
produced containing conservation related maps for the province. Several criteria were used in the
assessment to determine Terrestrial Critical Biodiversity Areas (CBAs) (Figure 9) and the Aquatic
CBA’s (Figure 10). The study area thus intersects both Terrestrial CBA 1, CBA 2 and CBA 3
habitats (Figure 9) and Aquatic CBA 1 and CBA2 habitats (Figure 110). However, as the
transmission line is already existing and if new tracks can be avoided in intact vegetation then any
new impacts within these areas will be minimal in the long-term.
Figure 9: The Eastern Cape Biodiversity Conservation Plan (Berliner & Desmet, 2007), Terrestrial CBAs
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 30 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
Figure 10: The Eastern Cape Biodiversity Conservation Plan (Berliner & Desmet, 2007), Aquatic CBAs
Figure 11 presents a finer scale map of the study area compiled as part of the NMBM Bioregional
Plan, which was promulgated in 2014. The results of the assessment conducted by SRK Consulting
(2014), indicated that due to the level of impact and alien plant cover, the study area contains no
species with conservation concern (mostly NMBM endemics), but does contain Ecological Support
Areas or Critical Biodiversity Areas (Figure 11). Importantly except for Hopewell Conservation
Estate (not shown in the map below), the transmission line has avoided all protected areas. Several
additional protected areas or areas with conservation status (e.g. Ramsar Listing for the Swartkops
Estuary, Coega IDZ Open Space Management Plan)), which are indirectly marked as CBA’s have
also been considered in this assessment Figure 11).
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 31 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
Figure 11: NMBM Bioregional conservation plan CBAs
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 32 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
5 ECOLOGICAL SENSITIVITY ASSESSMENT
Based on the findings of this study, the various habitats (vegetation & wetlands) were ranked in
terms of their sensitivity to development, using the following criteria, listed in order of importance,
i.e. the habitat or vegetation unit:
• Contained Species of Special Concern (SSC)
• Habitat was protected under a form of legislation
• Exhibited a high degree of biodiversity
• Exhibited a limited degree of degradation
• A unique habitat that is not well represented within the region
• Provided an important ecosystem role or support system, e.g. ecological corridor
This was then used to rate against observed vegetation units / habitats and is summarised as
follows:
• Habitats containing high densities of SSC or exhibit high levels of species abundances were rated as
HIGH
• All intact vegetation units or unimproved vegetation types, i.e. these have been impacted upon, but are still able to contribute at the landscape level towards ecosystem function and / or assist in the maintenance of ecological corridors, were rated as MODERATE
• All modified, transformed or man-made systems were rated as LOW. These systems have limited restoration / rehabilitation potential.
Based then on these criteria, the study area was found to have no HIGH sensitivity habitats, while
the remaining Thicket areas (Figure 2&3) or areas listed as under the NEM:BA Threatened
ecosystems (Figure 4) were rated a HIGH – MODERATE dependent on the degree of impacts
already occurring. Therefore, no new tracks should be placed within any intact areas, and as
indicated previously these should be marked out prior to construction once the final design has been
completed (I.e. placement of additional stays).
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 33 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
6 PROVINCIAL LEGISLATION AND POLICY
Regard the protected flora, the Eastern Cape Provincial Nature Conservation Ordinance (PNCO)
includes a list of protected flora (See Table 2). Any plants found within the sites will be described
in this report. Should any species that are listed in the ordinance be found, the relevant permits
should be obtained by the proponent for their relocation or destruction, as required.
This also pertains the Protected Trees listed under the National Forestry Act (Act of 84 1998) under
the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF). Only one species, namely
Sideroxylon inerme (Milkwood) was observed within the project alignment, particularly in the
thicket and Bontveld areas between the Gamtoos and Van Staeden’s River and in remaining thicket
areas in the KwanoBuhle to Grassridge areas.
It therefore recommended that a follow-up survey is conducted to prior to construction as part of a
Plant Search and Rescue operation as part of the final walkdown, to identify the exact number of
trees that may be affected once the final design is known, e.g. the placement of new stays.
However, in this final Walkdown any stays that wold impact on any of the species listed under the
PNCO or NFA, should be moved to avoid any of these species.
7 ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS AND IDENTIFICATION OF MANAGEMENT ACTIONS
During this investigation, it was found that the proposed footprint has been disturbed in the past,
and the only direct impacts would be the following.
Note as the transmission line is an existing structure within the landscape, and associated with
several other existing larger transmission lines, the impacts on birds was not assessed, but it is
advised that a suitable specialist form part of the ECO team, to indicate where new or upgraded bird
diverters may be required, e.g. large floodplain areas.
7.1 Impact 1: Loss of vegetation
Environmental Impact:
Due to the nature of the project, vegetation will be limited to new stays and certain areas where additional access may be required
Activity/Aspect & Impact Source:
Due to the nature of the proposed project this would start at the onset of the construction phase, but persist in the medium term in the operational phase impact. New tracks within intact areas of vegetation is not advised
Proposed Mitigation:
• Clearing of vegetation should be kept to a minimum, an making use of the existing roads and tracks where possible.
• Alien plant regrowth should also be monitored, and any such species should be removed during the construction phase.
• Where soils are slow to revegetate, these areas should be grubbed and plant with grass seed suitable for the region
• Any baresoils exposed to surface water runoff should be managed to prevent erosion / sedimentation.
Reference to EMP section:
EMP to be completed after review of draft basic assessment report.
Impact Significance
Without Mitigation:
Duration: Magnitude Extent/Scale: Probability: Impact Status: Significance: Medium term (3)
Moderate (6) Local (2) Medium (3) NEGATIVE Medium
With Mitigation:
Duration: Magnitude: Extent/Scale: Probability: Impact Status: Significance: Medium term (3)
Low (4) Site impact (1) Improbable (1) NEGATIVE Low
Potential to Mitigate: Moderate potential / easy to mitigate
Assessment Confidence: Complete
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 34 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 35 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
7.2 Impact 2: Loss habitat of containing protect species or Species of Special Concern
Environmental Impact: Due to the nature of the project, vegetation will be cleared contains species shown in this report, which are protected under the Provincial Nature Conservation Ordinance (PNCO) or the NFA. This does not however prohibit the development from continuing, as these species are common within the region.
Activity/Aspect & Impact Source:
Due to the nature of the proposed project this would start at the onset of the construction phase, but persist in the short term in the operational phase impact.
Proposed Mitigation:
• Clearing of vegetation should be kept to a minimum, and making use of the existing roads and tracks where possible.
• Alien plant regrowth should also be monitored, and any such species should be removed during the construction phase.
• Where soils are slow to revegetate, these areas should be grubbed and plant with grass seed suitable for the region
• A permit application for the removal of any of the Provincially Protected Plant Species must be submitted to the EC DEDTEA and it must be approved prior to
removal. A similar permit must be obtained in any of the
Milkwood’s indicated in this report will be disturbed from the Department of Fisheries and Forestry
Reference to EMP section:
EMP to be completed after review of draft basic assessment report.
Impact Significance
Without Mitigation:
Duration: Magnitude Extent/Scale: Probability: Impact Status: Significance: Medium term (3)
Moderate (6) Local (2) Medium (3) NEGATIVE Medium
With Mitigation:
Duration: Magnitude: Extent/Scale: Probability: Impact Status: Significance: Medium term (3)
Low (4) Site impact (1) Improbable (1) NEGATIVE Low
Potential to Mitigate: Moderate potential / easy to mitigate
Assessment Confidence: Complete
7.3 Impact 3: The potential spread of alien vegetation
Environmental Impact: 4 invasive species were recorded during the survey
Activity/Aspect & Impact Source:
Due to the nature of the proposed project this would start at the onset of the construction phase, but persist in the medium term in the operational phase impact.
Proposed Mitigation:
• Clearing of vegetation should be kept to a minimum, and making use of the existing roads and tracks where possible.
• Alien plant regrowth should also be monitored, and any such species should be removed during the construction phase.
• Where soils are slow to revegetate, these areas should be grubbed and plant with grass seed suitable for the region
Reference to EMP section:
EMP to be completed after review of draft basic assessment report.
Impact Significance
Without Mitigation:
Duration: Frequency: Extent/Scale: Probability: Impact Status: Significance: Long term Occasional Site Probable NEGATIVE High
With Mitigation:
Duration: Frequency: Extent/Scale: Probability: Impact Status: Significance: Medium term Occasional Site Impact Probable NEGATIVE Low
Potential to Mitigate: Moderate potential / easy to mitigate
Assessment Confidence: Complete
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 36 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
7.4 Impact 4: Loss of Critical Biodiversity Areas (CBA), Protected Areas and habitat fragmentation
Environmental Impact: Based on the information contained within the ECBCP and NMBM Bioregional plan the site is within Critical Biodiversity Areas and close to or within several protected areas.
Activity/Aspect & Impact Source:
Due to the nature of the proposed project this would start at the onset of the construction phase, but persist in the medium term in the operational phase impact. As the pipeline is buried and evidenced in the recovery of the vegetation along older portions of the pipeline, the vegetation/ habitat does show a high degree of recovery.
Proposed Mitigation:
• Clearing of vegetation should be kept to a minimum, and making use of the existing roads and tracks where possible.
• Construction activities should not exceed the proposed construction boundaries by more than 2m to avoid the secondary impact of construction and increasing the areas that would require clearing and rehabilitation
Reference to EMP section:
EMP to be completed after review of draft basic assessment report.
Impact Significance
Without Mitigation:
Duration: Frequency: Extent/Scale: Probability: Impact Status: Significance: Long term Occasional Site impact Probable NEGATIVE Medium
With Mitigation:
Duration: Frequency: Extent/Scale: Probability: Impact Status: Significance: Medium term Occasional Site Impact Probable NEGATIVE Low
7.5 Impact 5: Loss of aquatic habitat
Environmental Impact: The proposed works will require any disturbance of any known aquatic features and have been avoided by the current placement of the towers
Activity/Aspect & Impact Source:
No activities within the aquatic environment are expected but this concomitant on the mitigations being upheld
Proposed Mitigation:
• No new tracks or stays should be placed within the delineated waterbodies.
• All disturbed areas near water courses should be returned / reinstated to follow the natural ground levels, i.e. no mounds that can alter or disturb flow
• Any bare soils exposed to surface water runoff should be managed to prevent erosion / sedimentation.
Reference to EMP section:
EMP to be completed after review of draft basic assessment report.
Impact Significance
Without Mitigation:
Duration: Frequency: Extent/Scale: Probability: Impact Status: Significance: Long term Occasional Site impact Probable NEGATIVE Medium
With Mitigation:
Duration: Frequency: Extent/Scale: Probability: Impact Status: Significance: Medium term Occasional Site Impact Probable NEGATIVE Low
Potential to Mitigate: Moderate potential / easy to mitigate
Assessment Confidence: Complete
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 37 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
7.6 Impact 6: Changes to the hydrological regime – sedimentation and erosion
Environmental Impact: Any changes to surface levels within the water course can lead to changes in the localised hydrological regime, which could then lead to sedimentation and erosion due to increases in flow velocities.
Activity/Aspect & Impact Source:
Due to the nature of the proposed project this would start at the onset of the construction phase, but persist in the medium term in the operational phase impact. As the pipeline is buried and evidenced in the recovery of the vegetation along older portions of the pipeline, the vegetation/ habitat does show a high degree of recovery.
Proposed Mitigation:
• Clearing of vegetation should be kept to a minimum, and making use of the existing roads and tracks where possible.
• Construction activities should not exceed the proposed construction boundaries by more than 2m to avoid the secondary impact of construction and increasing the areas that would require clearing and rehabilitation
• All disturbed areas within the water course should be returned / reinstated to follow the natural ground levels, i.e. no mounds that can alter or disturb flow
• Any baresoils exposed to surface water runoff should be managed to prevent erosion / sedimentation.
Reference to EMP section:
EMP to be completed after review of draft basic assessment report.
Impact Significance
Without Mitigation:
Duration: Frequency: Extent/Scale: Probability: Impact Status: Significance: Long term Occasional Site impact Probable NEGATIVE Medium
With Mitigation:
Duration: Frequency: Extent/Scale: Probability: Impact Status: Significance: Medium term Occasional Site Impact Probable NEGATIVE Low
Potential to Mitigate: Moderate potential / easy to mitigate
Assessment Confidence: Complete
7.7 Impact 7: Potential water quality impacts
Environmental Impact: Spills and leaks from any plant or the mixing of cement / concrete near or within a water course.
Activity/Aspect & Impact Source:
Due to the nature of the proposed project this would remain a construction phase impact only
Proposed Mitigation:
• Chemicals used for construction must be stored safely on site and surrounded by bunds. Chemical storage containers must be regularly inspected so that any leaks are detected early.
• Littering and contamination of water sources during construction must be prevented by effective construction camp and on-site management.
• Emergency plans must be in place in case of spillages onto road surfaces and water courses.
• No stockpiling should take place within a water course.
• All stockpiles must be protected from erosion, stored on flat areas where run-off will be minimised, and be surrounded by bunds.
• Stockpiles must be located away from river channels.
• The construction camp and necessary ablution facilities meant for construction workers must not be located in any of the delineated watercourses or wetland areas (including 50m buffer)
Reference to EMP section: EMP to be completed after review of draft basic assessment report.
Impact Significance
Without Mitigation:
Duration: Frequency: Extent/Scale: Probability: Impact Status: Significance: Long term Occasional Site impact Probable NEGATIVE Medium
With Mitigation:
Duration: Frequency: Extent/Scale: Probability: Impact Status: Significance: Short term Occasional Site Impact Probable NEGATIVE Low
Potential to Mitigate: Moderate potential / easy to mitigate
Assessment Confidence: Complete
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 38 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
8 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The information collected in the field indicated that site (alignment) are situated within mostly
disturbed areas, showing various degrees of recovery. Of importance was the existing track which
limit the degree of impact on any intact vegetation types or areas with conservation concern. The
Preferred Alternative option is thus supported, but on condition that no wholesale clearing occurs,
and that any new tracks must be constructed once a site-specific assessment has been conducted by
a Botanist.
It is the reasoned opinion of the specialist, therefore, that the development should be allowed to
proceed, on the following conditions: • Clearing of vegetation should be kept to a minimum, and making use of the existing roads and tracks
where possible. More specifically, construction activities should not exceed the proposed construction boundaries by more than 2m to avoid the secondary impact of construction and increasing the areas that would require clearing and rehabilitation.
• Alien plant regrowth should also be monitored, and any such species should be removed during the construction phase.
• Where soils are slow to revegetate, these areas should be grubbed and plant with grass seed suitable for the region
• A permit application for the removal of any of the Provincially Protected Plant Species must be submitted to the EC DEDEAT and it must be approved prior to removal. If possible the Milkwood’s mentioned in this report should be avoided.
• The attached Risk Assessment Matrix (Appendix 1) be submitted with this report to the Department of Water and Sanitation as part of the requisite Water Use License Application process (potential General Authorisations), Altough based on the project description provided no crossings will be required and it is thus only the activities within 500m of a wetland boundary that would require authorisation, such as the new cable stays. However, this should be discussed with DWS once the final positions are known. A separate map/s could then be provided indicating the stay position in relation to the wetlands, their Present Ecological State, for DWS to make an informed decision in this regard.
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 39 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
9 REFERENCES
Agricultural Resources Act, 1983 (Act No. 43 of 1983).
Berliner D. and Desmet P. 2007. Eastern Cape Biodiversity Conservation Plan: Technical Report.
Department of Water Affairs and Forestry Project No 2005-012, Pretoria. 1 August 2007
Bromilow, C. 2010. Problem Plants and Alien Weeds of South Africa. Briza Publications (Third
edition). Pretoria.
Fish, L., Mashau, A.C., Moeaha, M.J. & Nembudani, M.T. 2015. Identification guide to southern
African grasses. An identification manual with keys, descriptions and distributions. Strelitzia 36.
South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria.
Germishuizen, G. and Meyer, N.L. (eds) (2003). Plants of southern Africa: an annotated checklist.
Strelitzia 14, South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria.
Minerals and Petroleum Resources Development Act, 2002 (Act No. 28 of 2002), as amended.
Mucina, L. and Rutherford, M.C. (2006). South African vegetation map. South African National
Biodiversity Institute – Accessed: http://bgis.sanbi.org/vegmap/map.asp, 18 September 2009.
Mucina, L., Rutherford, M.C., Powrie, L.W., van Niekerk, A. & van der Merwe, J.H. 2014.
Vegetation Field Atlas of Continental South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. Strelitzia 33. South
African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria.
National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998), as amended.
National Water Act, 1998 (Act No. 36 of 1998), as amended
SRK Consulting, 2014. Final Bioregional Plan for the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality. Port
Elizabeth, South Africa, December.
Van Oudtshoorn, F.P. 1992. Guide to Grasses of South Africa. Briza Publications
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 40 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
D2 – DWS RISK ASSESSMENT MATRIX
Ecological Assessment – August 2017
Scherman Colloty & Associates 41 JG Afrika (Pty) Ltd
NAME and REGISTRATION No of SACNASP Professional member: ……Dr Brian Colloty………………………….. Reg no. ……Ecologist 400268/07……………………………….
No. Phases Activity Aspect Impact Flow
Regime
Physico &
Chemical
(Water
Quality)
Habitat
(Geomorph +
Vegetation)
Biota Severity Spatial scale Duration ConsequenceFrequency of
activity
Frequency of
impact
Legal
IssuesDetection Likelihood Significance Risk Rating Confidence level Control Measures
Borderline LOW
MODERATE
Rating Classes
1Construction
phaseClearing of vegetation
Clearing of remaining
vegetation within the channelNone anticipated 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 LOW 90-100 Construction EMP
2Construction
phaseClearing of vegetation
Clearing of remaining
vegetation within the channelNone anticipated 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 LOW 90-100 Construction EMP
3Construction
phase
Loss of Species of
Special Concern
Several plant species within
the region are conservation
worthy or are protected by the
Provincial Nature
Conservation Ordinance or
NFA
Loss of threatened or protected plant species,
although NO aquatic related species were
observed within the site
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 LOW 100 Construction EMP
5Construction
phase
Spills and leaks from
construction vehicles /
machinery
Impact on localised surface
water quality
Leaks from plant / machinery during the
construction phase2 1 1 1 1.25 1 1 3.25 2 2 5 1 10 32.5 LOW 90-100 Construction EMP
8 Operational Phase Water quality impactsAny spills or leaks from the
washing facility
All designs should include bunds or other
suitable mechanisms to prevent any additional
water quality impacts from reaching the
wetlands or channels
1 3 1 2 1.75 1 2 4.75 1 1 5 1 8 38 LOW 90-100 Construction EMP
RISK MATRIX (Based on DWS 2016 publication: Section 21 c and I water use Risk Assessment Protocol)
Risk to be scored for construction and operational phases of the project. MUST BE COMPLETED BY SACNASP PROFESSIONAL MEMBER REGISTERED IN AN APPROPRIATE FIELD OF EXPERTISE.
Severity